T2 standard infect Turn 3 win

by mattfloyddevey on 08 January 2011

Main Deck (60 cards)

Sideboard (10 cards)

Artifacts (1)


Land (2)

Submit a list of cards below to bulk import them all into your sideboard. Post one card per line using a format like "4x Birds of Paradise" or "1 Blaze", you can even enter just the card name by itself like "Wrath of God" for single cards.


Deck Description

This is an awesome infect deck that can win turn 3, which i have done several times. The corpse cur is so you can retrieve cards from you graveyard, especially if they are running a burn deck. Just pump up your creatures and do some major damage. If you have livewire lash out if they target the creature you have it equipped to, they get 2 poison counters, that even includes your spells! You can destroy the opponent without even attacking. If you are facing a control deck you should switch in putrefax or skithiyx, but they are not in the main deck because they are pretty slow. The garruk is for end game he can finish the game with his last ability giving all my creatures +3/+3 and trample.

Deck Tags

  • Tournament

Deck at a Glance

Social Stats

10
Likes

This deck has been viewed 11,257 times.

Mana Curve

Mana Symbol Occurrence

008021

Card Legality

  • Not Legal in Standard
  • Legal in Modern
  • Legal in Vintage
  • Legal in Legacy

Deck discussion for T2 standard infect Turn 3 win

I played this at a big FNM event and beat a couple people in just 3 turns, it was very effective

0
Posted 08 January 2011 at 13:45

Permalink

how 0.o

0
Posted 10 January 2011 at 22:33

Permalink

turn 1: play land
turn 2: play land and creature
turn 3 play land and 3 pump spells

1
Posted 17 January 2011 at 16:17

Permalink

a friend of mine also came to the fnm with a deck close to this one and got two wins out of three games. to yorgos1 he won on 3rd turn with an infect creature dealing 10 poison counter with one attack (my friend did this mostly with plague stinger and a combination of either giant growth,groundswell and vines)
pretty good for a budget deck

0
Posted 11 January 2011 at 20:25

Permalink

You can replace verdant catacombs with terramorphic expanses if you want it to be cheaper, my friend just happened to have some

0
Posted 17 January 2011 at 09:28

Permalink

I recently tested this type of infect deck, and it seems (to me at least) that there is a lack of land/mana present. Typically when the game starts, I find that, more often than not, one is heavily dependent on the amount of land in the initial hand. Due to the amount of creatures/spells, it's very likely that 3-4 turns will go by without drawing a land. In lasting games, this certainly isn't an issue, but when one only has 2-3 mana to begin with, it can hinder your progress. While the spells/creatures don't cost a lot, if you're playing with limited mana and your opponent has the opportunity to utilize 5-6 mana, you're at a disadvantage. I've personally attempted to alter a few cards in order to add some land, but I certainly don't know what would be decent to take out.

My question, what is your take on the amount of mana? Has that been an issue for you when using this deck? If it is, what do you suggest swaping for support?

0
Posted 19 January 2011 at 17:57

Permalink

even though I am running 19 lands i havent had much a problem with lands. There is only one match i can think of that i have been mana screwed. at the same time I have won games with only 2 lands. If I had Too many lands then i wouldnt be able to play monsters and this is meant to be an agro deck. If you have a bad hand just mulligan.

0
Posted 19 January 2011 at 18:53

Permalink

I suppose it's all just personal opinion, but I agree this deck runs well with only a few lands. From what I've tested though, it usually requires at least 3 against another decent deck. So, typically one would have to mulligan to ensure that they'll have at least 3 within the first few moves. Other than that though, this deck works as it should, it's quick and powerful. However, once your opponent understands the risks of your infect creatures they will begin using more creatures for defense. What decks have you tested infect against?

Have you considered Garruk as an addition instead of one of the Corpse Curs? The Corpse cur seems out of place (without Putrefax/Blight Dragon already in the deck), since most of your infect creatures are small and rarely do you run out of creatures to play. The four mana cost could be better spent of a creature/buffs. Since this deck runs on limited land, getting Garruk out would immediately grant an additional two mana to play a creature, and then the following turn you have the opportunity to buff your infect creatures +3/3 and trample. Since an opponent will find themselves sacrificing cheap creatures to avoid the burst of poison counters, trample would essentially help to negate the blocking obstacle.

0
Posted 20 January 2011 at 17:15

Permalink

I have tested the deck against a lot of different deck, the only one i had a big problem with was burn such as pyromancer accention, which is why i have the corpse cur. A bunch of matches i was able to suprise opponents with 8+ poison counters turn 3. But the garruk idea is pretty good, What would you suggest replacing garruk for

0
Posted 20 January 2011 at 20:56

Permalink

One of the issues that becomes increasingly prominent in games is the reality that the 3-turn win sometimes is nothing more than ideal. I've found that it can be unstoppable at various points, but only if the other player has their mana tapped, isn't expecting the attack, or has no spells to counter the assault. After you play 1-2 rounds, typically the other person is going to be smart enough to understand that letting your creatures by when you have mana available is a bad idea. Instead, they'll focus of kill spells and sacrificing creatures to absorb the infect damage. Since this deck lacks trample/unblockable, it seems to be best to focus on a number of infect to outflank the opponent or livewire lash in order to clear their defense of creatures and then attack. In multiple instances, when the opponent realizes that you're going to be tossing out buffs, I've been victim of an 'Unsummon', combat damage preventing card, or even lightning bolt after attacking. Due to the chain of events, it's possible to lose a creature+all its buffs to one of those simple costing cards, which then slows down your deck for a bit.

The surprise aspect certainly is wonderful, but the other player will quickly become aware of your potential and proceed to counter it by tightening defense. As far as Corpse Cur goes, I felt this deck consists of mainly small cost cards, and its 4Mana cost seemed steep for its minor ability and 2/2. It seems better to play a 1/1 for 2Mana and then utilize a Prey's Vengeance/Groundswell/Giant Growth in case they try and burn the infect. I've yet to test it, but I honestly believe Garruk, maybe even two, might be useful to swap in for the Corpse Cur, keeping two in the side deck. The ability to untap land each turn is great for the regeneration of the Mambas/Dragon, and can allow you to play creatures and spells while wielding only 4 mana. (Use 4 to play creatures, untap 2, use the 2 for spells.) Finally, the trample +3/+3 just seems like a finishing move after getting even one creature out. They'll be forced to block it, and you can just buff it up even more with cheap spells in order to deal the remaining poison counters.

0
Posted 20 January 2011 at 21:18

Permalink

Jingle has deleted this comment.

Posted 20 January 2011 at 21:37

Permalink

Jingle has deleted this comment.

Posted 20 January 2011 at 21:45

Permalink

Once the suprise attack is over that is what livewire lash is for, I can just equip it to a creature and then If i use any instant spell on that creature the opponent will get 2 poison counters, If they try and unsummon or lightning bolt they get 2 poison counters. It keeps the game rolling once they start defending

0
Posted 21 January 2011 at 09:58

Permalink

I am going to play test it today with garruk, more and less livewire's, 19 or 20 lands and skithrex and see what is best for the deck

0
Posted 21 January 2011 at 09:46

Permalink

Jingle has deleted this comment.

Posted 21 January 2011 at 10:24

Permalink

Jingle has deleted this comment.

Posted 21 January 2011 at 10:26

Permalink

That sounds like a plan, good luck with it. At the moment, I've swapped the Corpse Cur(s) for additional land. Where the original deck sports 15, I'm going to simply experiment with an additional 2 minus the weight of the Corpse Cur. So, along with the fetch lands, that brings this deck to 21 lands. Although it seems less than the standard 24, you're certainly right in noting that you only need a few lands to use, and the fetch lands help minimize your chance of getting land after you already have 3 down. I've also swapped 2 Vines of Vastwood out for 2 Hand of the Praetor(s). This was mainly to increase the creature count, provide a powerful/useful creature for longer games, and avoid the high cost of Skithrex. Although I'm hesitant to take out any buffs, Vines of Vastwood always seemed like a situational card. It's main ability is useful in protecting your creature when attacking/defending, but sometimes it doesn't help much aside from the Livewire combo. I still believe it's a great card to add, but I think two should be plenty and the additional creatures will help counter the absence of the Corpse Cur(s) ability and provide a stronger presence.

As much as drawing two livewire's in your intial hand is troublesome, this deck seems to revolve 50% about the card. In some matches, I've found that if you can simply save your buffs and attach the artifact to the creature, the following turn you can just toss out the buffs and there's nothing your opponent can really do. You can either load them up with poison counters, or clear the way of their defense and attack with your buffed creature. I think one less livewire would be good, but taking too many out begins to withdraw the deck from its originality. A lot of infect work with Distortion Strike, Proliferate, Skithrex, Putrefax; so you've definitely done a great job with creating a different and effective infect deck. In 2v2s with a team member who uses distortion strike and counters, this deck is deadly and frustrating for the other team.

0
Posted 21 January 2011 at 10:26

Permalink

thanks for the suggestions, I will have to try out some of the things you mentioned

0
Posted 21 January 2011 at 12:04

Permalink

everyone has a deck like this... it's the in thing to do right now.

0
Posted 22 January 2011 at 22:35

Permalink

I made this a little bit ago, but posted more recently

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 17:29

Permalink

He liked it before it was mainstream

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 19:10

Permalink

i mean i guess i can see it, but blight momba is too slow and garruk is too, your deck isnt using enough synergy like i see in the decks at my fnm, maybe you just have an easy going tourney scene

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 17:46

Permalink

-1 Vampire's Bite
+1 Vines of Vastwood.

Nothing's better than saying no to a doom blade or grasp...although with lash on it would hurt them but if you need to swing with it or you need it as a blocker then it's certainly better than a plain ol' +3/+0.

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 19:24

Permalink

Jingle has deleted this comment.

Posted 23 January 2011 at 21:43

Permalink

I'm not sure if the addition of another Vines of Vastwood is worthwhile. From an external view, the +4/+4 and 'shroudish' ability is obviously better, but Vamp's Bite seems like a better choice, for this quick deck. First, this deck runs with both swamps and forests, and it's going to be best to find buffs for each type of mana. If you load this deck up with too many forest buffs, there'll be instances where you'll be unable to play the required green buffs because you'll have 1-2 swamps in play that won't allow them. Since the creature cards are equally balanced between Forest/Swamp, it seems fine to include the Bite over the Vines of Vastwood. The other reason for including the extra Bite is the reality that Vines is expensive. Most of the time, if you're going for a one shot, it's going to be better to simpy toss out 3 buffs with +3, rather then waste 2 mana for a +4 (That's where Groundswell is useful, a 1 Mana cost card with a potential for +4/+4). That'll still deliver the 10 poison counters, where Vines'll cost, not only 2 Mana, but specifically 2 Green Mana, which could prevent you from casting other green cards that turn. Vines of Vastwood certainly is great, but I think 2-3 is better than 4. Winding up with multiple of them in your hand is potentially harmful, as it'll cost four mana to use them effectively. It's a great card, but for a quick deck as this one, wouldn't it be best to pull for more cheap buffs? In testing, this deck essentially requires the effective use of every bit of mana you have, both on your turn and on your opponents turn.

As far as Doom blade goes, this deck can't really handle it due to its cost. Sure, you might get to turn four and kill their creature and attack, but you'll only be able to toss 2 of your buffs at max, which probably wouldn't finish them. What about Disfigure or Stabbing Pain? Both are 1 Black Mana cards Disfigure makes a creature -2/-2 until the end of turn. Stabbing Pain makes a creature -1/-1 until the end of turn and then taps it. Since this deck thrives early in the game, Disfigure would likely kill of any creatures, allowing you to take the opponent off-guard and attack. You can also buff your own creature while livewire is equipped and then counter it yourself with a giant growth if you're desperate. I think Stabbing Pain would be a better potential 'kill spell' though, as the -1/-1 would still kill early game creatures, creatures wounded from infect, and most burn cards. It's best feature is its ability to tap a creature, therefore allowing you to avoid blockers and attack directly. Or, it can be used when your opponent is about to attack, rendering a creature useless for the attack and your own combat phase.

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 21:47

Permalink

thanks jingle, thats what i was going for

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 19:46

Permalink

I have a deck similar to this and i have managed turn 3 wins but the condition to achieve it is so specific it's not very feasible. Perfect hand would be Plague Stinger, 1 swamp and 1-2 other land and 3 pump spells. My biggest problem was i'm only swinging with 1 creature and pumping that so if i don't get a perfect hand and the game goes past 3 turns then they have a chance to set up a defense such as Ratchet Bomb, a creature with protection, or just kill spells.

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 22:22

Permalink

I don't see this deck as having that much staying power. Add in a vines of the vastwood and it can buy you a turn. I splash blue for distortion strike so even when my opponent has down turn 6 creatures, i can sneak by them ftw. Here's my deck http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=102946

0
Posted 23 January 2011 at 22:41

Permalink

thats what the livewire lashes are for

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 19:46

Permalink

I don't think there are enough creatures. I tried sample hand 5 times before I got a creature in the hand.

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 10:03

Permalink

I didn't have that problem at all. I played with it just fine and I just did the sample had 10 times and always had a creature in the opening hand

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 19:45

Permalink

Consider Invigorate. +4/+4 has 0 cmc because you can just give them 3 life since you don't care about their life total anyway.

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 11:51

Permalink

invigorate is awesome, but it is meant to be standard

0
Posted 24 January 2011 at 11:56

Permalink

I recently ordered the cards online to make this deck and i love it! I love the livewire combo with the buffs....All i can say is very nice deck i think its amazing! If anyone would be interected in checking out my vampire deck and make suggestions i would rly appreciate it!

0
Posted 28 January 2011 at 02:11

Permalink

thanks, that makes me feel pretty good. I hope you enjoy

0
Posted 28 January 2011 at 08:46

Permalink